Page 2485 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 23 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
a draft contract was under preparation whilst negotiation by officials centred on some of the tougher clauses. Then there was a dramatic change. On Friday, 17 June 1994, Mr Downy released a media statement which was in stark contrast to the TAB to TAB negotiations which were making daily progress. Mr Downy's media - - -
Mrs Carnell: Why?
MR LAMONT: Well may you ask why, Mrs Carnell, because I intend to tell you. Mr Downy's media release said, "the door is closed to any admittance by the ACTTAB into the New South Wales pool and the ACT Government would have to put up a strong and compelling case to open it".
In another move on Friday, 15 July, which could be described only as reactionary, in a single day the commission rate of the pool link was increased by the New South Wales Minister from 0.25 per cent to one per cent of all ACTTAB bets transmitted. This would have meant a difference in costs to ACTTAB of approximately $750,000 a year. Obviously, once enlightened advice was sought, the increase was reversed by the Minister and the rate went back to 0.25 per cent, which, incidentally, is still 25 per cent higher than the cost of the new Victorian link. In addition, on a whim, Mr Downy reduced the term of the agreement from the negotiated term of three years to 12 months. In a display of consistency, he also saw sense and revised this decision at a later date. A further example of the arrogance of the terms offered included a proposed prohibition on ACTTAB accepting cash bets from known New South Wales TAB punters. Such restrictions, if not also illegal, are impossible to manage and would seriously restrict the ability of ACTTAB to increase its future betting activity.
This staggering approach to contract negotiations was clearly driven by something other than strictly commercial imperatives which had characterised the TAB to TAB dealings. ACTTAB have expressed the view that they were not prepared to make a recommendation to me seeking approval to enter into a contract with New South Wales because of unacceptable conditions, which included a commission rate double what was being charged under the Victorian agreement at that time; a significant monetary penalty if ACTTAB terminated the agreement, for any reason, in the first year; restrictions on the establishment of new accounts; no new telephone accounts outside the ACT; a requirement to review the operations of ACTTAB with a view to the New South Wales TAB subsuming our TAB into it; and a 12-month agreement, which was later reversed and revised to a three-year agreement. Furthermore, New South Wales required additional prohibitions on other aspects of the operation and administration of racing and gaming in the Territory, including a prohibition on scheduled phantom race meetings, restrictions on bookmakers' operations, and a prohibition on the establishment of a TAB outlet in any proposed betting auditorium. Many of these prohibited activities were not controlled by ACTTAB.
By contrast, the agreement negotiated with the Victorian TAB is an equitable commercial agreement which provides both parties with appropriate rights. The agreement - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .